"Stealing" as a verb for copying thoughts, ideas, or other intangibles has a long history. Longer than this defensive posture of people who want to feel better about ripping shit off.

Agreed, but this is not the case. It would be "stealing" if they copied the text of his novels and sold them signed by a different author. In that case, the correct verb is "sharing".

I have no idea what you think "stolen" means -- but whatever definition you are using, it is antique and not up to the task of describing the activity of theft as it exists today.

Nevertheless historical usage includes, "stealing someone's idea", etc. which is as least an applicable sense.

Languages change. Arguing definitions doesn’t contribute to the conversation, it only makes you look pedantic.

I think the OP has a point though. Back in the beginning of the DRM wars, many argued that "IP theft", "thieves", "stealing" were metaphors used by media companies to mislead customers. You know the clumsy anti-piracy advert, "you wouldn't steal a car...". It was clumsy then and it's clumsy now.

Illegal copying is not stealing. Sad to see this narrative won in the end, I thought we were past this. I though we -- the users -- had won.

"Stealing an idea" has been a phrase for far longer than that though. Stealing as a metaphor for intangible objects isn't a creation of the media companies.

> "Stealing an idea" has been a phrase for far longer than that though.

If it was only that, it may be somewhat justified. But in this case the "thief" is not making any profit from the stuff he has "stolen", he has just given away a copy to another person. The correct verb in this case is "sharing".

I refuse to partake in the orwellian newspeak of using the verb "stealing" for the act of sharing. This is a hill I'm happy to die on.

'Infringing copyright' is also a correct verb for this situation. I 100% agree that 'stealing' is not a valid word to use here. But I also don't expect most authors to be happy calling it 'sharing'.

Sure. Both are compatible. The generic act is "sharing", and this act happens to be "copyright infringement" in some cases. I don't see how anybody could say that the sentence "Sharing this file with other people infringes the copyright" uses a misleading language. Somebody may not like the socially positive aspect of the verb "to share", and they will prefer to use morally loaded terms, even if they are incorrect, but nobody can realistically say that using this verb for that act is wrong.

Agreed. But this precise usage, "stealing" digital products, is an invention of media companies. A stretching of a metaphor beyond all reasonable interpretation.

I’m not saying you’re one of them, but it seems the only time this pedantic definition of “stealing” is brought up is when that person is a pirate themselves, and they’re trying to justify what they’re doing as “not stealing.” As in: “I’m not stealing it; I’m just making a copy. The creator isn’t being deprived of anything.” Sure, you’re not literally taking anything from the creator, but you are robbing them of their right to do what they want with their creations.

Meanings change over time.

One can argue all they want about whether IP laws should exist, but as it stands right now (in re. to language and the law) it’s stealing.